NCJ Number
61591
Date Published
1977
Length
108 pages
Annotation
METHODOLOGY AND RESULTS ARE REPORTED FROM AN EVALUATION OF THE JUVENILE DEFENDER PROJECT FOR NORTH CAROLINA'S MECKLENBURG COUNTIES.
Abstract
THE JUVENILE DEFENDER PROJECT INTENDED TO DETERMINE WHETHER A SINGLE SPECIALIZED LAWYER FOR INDIGENT CHILDREN IN JUVENILE COURT WOULD GIVE BETTER SERVICE THAN ASSIGNING A DIFFERENT LAWYER FOR EACH CASE. THE EVALUATION USED A MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS OF CASE DISPOSITIONS WHERE TYPE OF COUNSEL WAS ONE OF A NUMBER OF VARIABLES CONSIDERED. SAMPLES FROM FORSYTH COUNTY AND MECKLENBURG COUNTY MERGED TO FORM ONE SAMPLE OF 1,437 CASES, WERE COLLECTED AT DIFFERENT TIME PERIODS. THE STATISTICAL ANALYSIS BEGAN WITH A SCREENING OF FACTORS TO SELECT THOSE THAT PRODUCED THE GREATEST VARIATION IN THE LIKELIHOOD OF PARTICULAR COURT DISPOSITIONS, ESPECIALLY COMMITMENT TO TRAINING SCHOOL AND TRANSFER TO SUPERIOR COURT. AFTER THE TWO FACTORS THAT EXERTED A PREDOMINANT INFLUENCE--COURT RECORD AND OFFENSE SERIOUSNESS--WERE SELECTED, A FURTHER ANALYSIS WAS PERFORMED TO FIND EFFECTS THAT OTHER FACTORS MIGHT HAVE HAD ON COURT DISPOSITION. RESULTS SHOWED THAT (1) FAMILY-RELATED FACTORS HAD SOME EFFECT ON THE PROBABILITY OF A TRAINING SCHOOL OR SUPERIOR COURT DISPOSITION; (2) DETAINED CHILDREN WERE MORE LIKELY TO TRAINING SCHOOL OR TRANSFERRED TO SUPERIOR COURT; (3) SCANT VARIATION WAS FOUND IN DISPOSITION RATES AMONG THE JUDGES; AND (4) THE TYPE OF COUNSEL JUVENILES HAD (ASSIGNED COUNSEL, JUVENILE DEFENDER, PRIVATE COUNSEL) DID NOT AFFECT THEIR PROBABILITY OF BEING COMMITTED TO TRAINING SCHOOL OR TRANSFERRED TO SUPERIOR COURT. THE APPENDIXES CONTAIN A DATA COLLECTION FORM AND FURTHER DISCUSSION OF STATISTICAL METHOD. GRAPHIC AND TABULAR DATA ARE PROVIDED. (RCB)